IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

DATE: 17.12.2025

Between :

Ponnam Santosh

… Petitioner

AND

The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, and

two others.

… Respondents.

O R D E R:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India seeking the following relief:

“…to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 3^rd respondent in seizing the petitioner’s Bus bearing Reg. No. TS-08-UA-3537 without issuing any seizure report and without there being any violation or case, as being illegal, arbitrary

and unjust, and to grant such other relief or reliefs…” 2. None appeared on behalf of the petitioner.

3. Mr. D. Pradeep, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, appearing on behalf of all the respondents, submits that in Crime No. 333 of 2018 registered at Nacharam Police Station, the vehicle in question was seized by respondent No. 3 and produced before the competent Court. Subsequently, upon filing of the charge sheet, a Calendar Case was registered as C.C. No. 6731 of 2019 on the file of the learned Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-V Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ranga Reddy District, where the matter is presently pending trial. It is further submitted that during the course of proceedings before the trial Court, the vehicle was released on interim custody on 11.09.2018 upon an appropriate application filed by the petitioner. Hence, the contention raised by the petitioner regarding illegal seizure of the vehicle is without merit, and the learned Assistant Government Pleader prayed that the petition be dismissed.

4. I have perused the material available on record.

5. The petitioner contends that respondent No. 3 seized the vehicle without any legal justification. However, the explanation offered by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home demonstrates that the vehicle was seized in connection with the crime proceedings and subsequently released to the petitioner on interim custody pursuant to an order of the trial Court. In view of the above facts, and in the absence of any tenable ground to establish irregularity or impropriety in the proceedings, this Court is of the considered view that no further orders are required in the matter. Nevertheless, the rights of the petitioner are reserved to pursue appropriate remedies before the trial Court in accordance with law in respect of the seizure of the vehicle.

6. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

_______________ N.TUKARAMJI, J Date: 17.12.2025 svl